v10 - More about 'real time stock control'

[markburley]

Extremely disappointed. Stock control must take into account if an item has been sold and this means paid for. Without this stock control is useless, when you only have 1 of an item guessing what might happen and adjusting the stock is frankly pathetic.

Actinic do not release this unless it works!

Mark

[TraceyHand]

I'm sorry, but if you want me to listen, knee-jerk reactions won't help your cause...

*takes deep, calming breath*

These are NOT knee-jerk reactions, Bruce.
We have been voicing these exact concerns from the second the feature was announced.
The posts/replies are not aimed directly at you, however. They are aimed to all and everyone concerned in getting this feature operational.

If this feature is to be included in V10, it has to work FULLY.
Not a half job. Not a job that works for some people and not others.
If it is going to provide 'real-time stock control' then it need to provide ACCURATE 'real-time stock control'.

End of story.
I don't think you will find ONE person here, as Actinic end-users, YOUR customers, who will disagree (except maybe Richard but he doesn't count (sorry Richard LOL))

[rmorrow]

I don't think you will find ONE person here, as Actinic end-users, YOUR customers, who will disagree (except maybe Richard but he doesn't count (sorry Richard LOL))

...plus maybe some ActiveStock users who have got all this functionality already!!!

[george]

...plus maybe some ActiveStock users who have got all this functionality already!!!

So how come you can manage and Actinic (seemingly) cannot?

[rmorrow]

So how come you can manage and Actinic (seemingly) cannot?

It hasn't been tested on every single PSP, but on the major ones it is live with (Worldpay, SagePay, PayPal), it seems to run the PSP-Pending option without any problems.

I have been wondering if I've missed something, but I'm sure I'd hear about it if I had....

[george]

This, I think, is a bizarre day.


FACT.

[brucet]

If you really really really can't get a system working of real-time stock control that only allocates stock when payment is received please at the minimum give us an option of not allocating stock to PSP pending orders

Just to clarify, are you saying that you would like Actinic to only allocate stock at the point of purchase if an online payment is received there and then, and not if

a) payment is not completed or is unsuccessful
b) some other payment method is used eg payment by cheque or on account

If you are only referring PSP orders, I'm not clear what the difference is between only allocating stock when payment is received, and not allocating stock when it isn't...

I would just like to get clear in my head what you're asking for.

[TraceyHand]

Actinic doesn't treat a 'cheque payment' or 'payment on account' order in the same way as it treats PSP pending ones though.
It's this differentiation in payment treatment that we want(need) to see in the real-time stock adjustments.

ANY order that gets directed to the "Pending" tab (as opposed to the PSP pending one) should be allowed to deplete stock online.
Now, I appreciate that, in the case of a PSP paid order, this means looking for the callback to check that the order was completed but, that's what we expect.

Cheque orders and other orders that are likely to end up in the 'pending' tab should, IMO, have their stock allocated (as opposed to aborted PSP orders which should not)

granted a number of these other payment method orders may end up unpaid, but at least the website is treating the stock levels in the same way as Actinic is then.

(and yes, it should have an option to turn the allocation of stock to psp pending orders ON also. I've never used it because we get a LOT of failed/repeated transactions but I am aware that some do and any solution should cater for both, IMO)

Hope that made sense!

[Mike Hughes]

I'm sorry, but if you want me to listen, knee-jerk reactions won't help your cause..

How am I supposed to respond to this Bruce? I know you're under pressure and disappointed by our response but this doesn't help one bit.

Mike

[Golf Tee Warehouse]

I would like Actinic to only allocate stock at the point of purchase if an online payment is received there and then (I hadn't thought about cheques, etc), but as you had said that this may not be possible initially I wanted to ensure there was an alternative where I can use the auto sync feature instead.

I had forgotten that there is a already an 'allocate stock for PSP pending orders' tick box, so the question can probably be ignored.

The more I am writing the more confused I am getting myself.

[Rich Brady]

ANY order that gets directed to the "Pending" tab (as opposed to the PSP pending one) should be allowed to deplete stock online...

Cheque orders and other orders that are likely to end up in the 'pending' tab should, IMO, have their stock allocated (as opposed to aborted PSP orders which should not)

Good enough for me.

[TraceyHand]

The more I am writing the more confused I am getting myself.

I fear that I'll join that club soon too!

[brucet]

I'm sorry, but if you want me to listen, knee-jerk reactions won't help your cause..

How am I supposed to respond to this Bruce? I know you're under pressure and disappointed by our response but this doesn't help one bit.

Sorry - I guess that may have been a knee-jerk reaction...

I'm not disappointed. All I'm trying to say is:

1) We are investigating how to make real time stock observe the 'Don't allocate stock for PSP Pending' rule. It's not ruled out - quite the opposite - and I'm pretty sure I never implied that it was. I'm just not in a position to say, 'Yes, and here's how we're going to do it'

2) Over-selling is one method that's used successfully in some markets to get around the problem of uncompleted or defaulted purchases. I know it relies on sufficient volume for the percentages to even out, but I'm not in a position to prejudge who it might and mightn't work for. So I offered it in good faith as an option to consider, that's proven effective in some cases. If it won't work for your business, I totally accept that - you only had to say so...

[TraceyHand]

Thing is, Bruce, over-ordering isn't likely to work for many people because we, your customers, are not 'major airlines'
The mere fact that you suggested something that the likes of BA and Virgin use implied that either
a) you have no idea who your customer base is made up of or
b) you're trying to implement something that is only useful for the 'big boys'

I'm (fairly) sure that neither of the above are true!
The 'big boys' have Enterprise.


Let's see if we can get this feature that Actinic Catalog and Business have been missing since concept working so it is useful for the majority of small/medium business owners who I am sure must make up a much larger percentage of your customer base.

[brucet]

Fair comment - bad example...